MELBOURNE, April 18, 2007 (LifeSiteNews.com) - A man's vision has been restored by a corneal patch grown from adult stem cells by a team at the University of Melbourne's Centre for Eye Research Australia (CERA) and the Bernard O'Brien Institute of Microsurgery (BOBIM).

The patch, which replicates the cornea, was cultivated from a single stem cell from a donor eye and was transplanted to the surface of the man's eyes.

The research team was led by Dr Mark Daniell (CERA) and Dr Erik Thompson (BOBIM).

The process, known as a limbal stem cell transplant, is thought to be the first of its kind in Australia. The Melbourne success significantly advances international research in limbal stem cell transplantation in the eyes.

The patient had severe vision loss caused by stem cell failure on the surface of the eye, causing scarring and a vascularised and opaque appearance.

"He had reduced mobility, could not read and could not work, but he has now resumed duties as an accountant, enjoys sight (slightly lower than normal 20/20 acuity) and has increased mobility and quality of life and renewed optimism," Dr Daniell reports.

He says the surface of the man's eyes was removed and the patch (about 50mm long and a micron thick) was applied and is healing well. "This technique can now assist people with alkaline burns who have damage to the surface of their eyes."

Dr Daniell and his team are now working toward developing a totally bio-engineered cornea, using a stem cell extracted from elsewhere on a person's body other than the eye.

thank you so much for the link. Ive been following research like this and, though it holds out hope for people with my condition in the future, it wont have any direct affect on me that I can envision.

The ability to grow a cornea from stem cells will offer someone like me a future opportunity for a transplant without a donor. That will affect the moral but not the medical aspect of the question for my condition. After my first corneal transplant I gained an entirely new appreciation for Mary Shelleys Frankensteins monster. Like him, I have parts in me from dead people. In my case it is currently up to four. Unlike the situation in that novel, all of the parts that have been used to help me come from willing donors. That is actually my point of departure, morally, on the argument over embryonic stem cell research. Beneficiaries of any research derived from embryonic stem cells actually have more in common, morally, with Bram Stokers Dracula, who requires the blood of unwilling victims to survive.

Theres a world of difference there.

That improvement in the moral issues involved in a transplant alone, however, would be a great comfort to me. I have never known how to express my thanks to those four souls who have been so generous to me over the last quarter of a centory, particularly since their generosity had to come under circumstances where they werent expecting to die, but their gift to me happened only because they met an untimely death. How do you thank someone for something like that, particularly if you dont know who they are?

But beyond that moral consideration there wont be any difference in the outcome for me. A transplant from this type of source or one from a donor will likely not be a good choice the next time my vision fails. It looks more and more likely that this latest transplant may not prove successful, though there is still hope, even if they have to repeat. But whatever the source the tissue in a transplanted cornea will be replaced by my own faulty tissue within about 10 years, meaning the underlying condition, undoubtedly genetic at its root, will reassert itself.

For someone like me there are two hopes, one wont happen in my lifetime and one may. The first is an outgrowth of this research, where they understand the underlying genetic problems and provide a retro-virus or some other genetic cure so that after a transplant my own tissue wont be my eyesights worst enemy. That wont happen while Im on this Earth. The other chance is actually less likely to happen in my lifetime, but is still a possibility. That would be if they come up with an bio-electronic way to artificially replace my natural vision. It looks likely that research is even further out, but you can never tell. Those breakthroughs are far harder to predict.

My one stipulation is that I wont submit myself to a bionic link to something running on Windows. Its just not going to happen!

Again, thanks for the ping.

7
posted on 04/18/2007 6:06:44 PM PDT
by Phsstpok
(Often wrong, but never in doubt)

oh no no no....the columns are registering “success stories”.
They can experiment all they want and feel like they are accomplishing something with mice and rats.
There are no success stories with actual human beings.

“I just like to point out that along with the ZERO successes from embryonic stem cell research, we must also consider the carnage that comes with it.”

true...and yet the supporters of embryonic stem cell research are correct when they wonder why pro-lifers aren’t making a big stink about all the frozen embryos in the in-vitro clinics that will never see the light of day.

Retinal pigment epithelial transplants have been attempted, but with little success so far. If this can be perfected, then, yes, RPE transplants derived from stem cells would be possible....theoretically

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.